From: Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com
Separating the workspace 'ownership' from the workspace 'membership' would
resolve this issue. It certainly has the potential to mess up some
workspace optimizations. Would you allow version selectors to change
workspace ownership?
Not in my server (:-).
> From: Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com
>
> So when I have two workspaces A and B both with bindings
> to a resource C, in which workspace is C?
>
> I'd just leave that up to the server. I'd suggest the following
> constraint: "the DAV:workspace of a resource MUST be the same as
> the DAV:workspace of one of its parents, unless the resource
> itself is a workspace, in which case the DAV:workspace MUST
> identify the resource itself."
Conceptually, why would you add this constraint if ownership and membership
are orthogonal concepts?
So a reserved 'yes', provided the constraint was made (for efficient
implementation reasons), and clients cannot change a resource's workspace
ownership.
Yes, I would have this constraint (to allow efficient distributed
workspace implementation), and would not provide a mechanism for the
client to change a resource's workspace.
Cheers,
Geoff